The Effect of Export and Imports on National Income in Kazakhstan: Econometric Analysis
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ISSN 0798 1015
HOME Revista ÍNDICES / A LOS AUTORES / To the
ESPACIOS ! Index ! AUTORS !
Vol. 40 (Number 35) Year 2019. Page 22
The Effect of Export and Imports on
National Income in Kazakhstan:
Econometric Analysis
El efecto de las exportaciones e importaciones sobre el
ingreso nacional en Kazajstán: análisis econométrico
SYZDYKOVA A. 1.; ABUBAKIROVA A. 2 & KELESBAYEV D. 3; OMAROVA A. 4; AMANIYAZOVA G.
5; SAUBETOVA B. 6 & ANSHAYEVA D. 7
Received: 02/04/2019 • Approved: 09x/10/2019 • Published 14/10/2019
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Methodology
4. Results and discussion
5. Conclusions
Bibliographic references
ABSTRACT: RESUMEN:
Foreign trade has an impact on the economy El comercio exterior tiene un impacto en la
through both exports and imports. Exports are economía a través de las exportaciones y las
considered as a contribution to national income and importaciones. Las exportaciones se consideran una
economy, while imports are considered as an exit contribución al ingreso y la economía nacionales,
from the economy. In the literature, it is generally mientras que las importaciones se consideran una
argued that exports have positive direct and salida de la economía. En la literatura,
indirect effects on the economy, while imports have generalmente se argumenta que las exportaciones
a negative direct impact on national income. The tienen efectos directos e indirectos positivos en la
aim of this study is to analyze the effect of exports economía, mientras que las importaciones tienen
and imports on national income with the quarterly un impacto directo negativo en el ingreso nacional.
data of 2000: 2017 period in Kazakhstan. The El objetivo de este estudio es analizar el efecto de
autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) model was las exportaciones e importaciones en el ingreso
used for this purpose. According to the analysis nacional con los datos trimestrales del período
results, the increase in both exports and imports in 2000: 2017 en Kazajstán. Se usó el método de
Kazakhstan increases the country's gross domestic prueba de límites ARDL para este propósito. Según
product (GDP). While the 1% increase in exports in los resultados del análisis, el aumento de las
the long term leads to a 0.38% increase in gross exportaciones e importaciones en Kazajstán
domestic product, the increase in imports by 1% aumenta el PIB del país. Mientras que el aumento
leads to an increase of 0.42% of gross domestic del 1% en las exportaciones a largo plazo conduce
product. The long-term effect of exports is stronger a un aumento del 0,38% en el PIB, el aumento de
than the short-term effect. Imports have a negative las importaciones en un 1% conduce a un aumento
impact on economic growth in the short term and del 0,42% del PIB. El efecto a largo plazo de las
have a positive effect on the long term. Likewise, exportaciones es más fuerte que el efecto a corto
income elasticity of imports was statistically plazo. Las importaciones tienen un impacto
significant and positive. An increase of 1% in negativo en el crecimiento económico a corto plazo
economic growth causes imports to increase by y tienen un efecto positivo en el largo plazo.0.60%. Asimismo, la elasticidad del ingreso de las
Keywords: effects, export. import, national importaciones fue estadísticamente significativa y
income, Kazakhstan positiva. Un aumento del 1% en el crecimiento
económico hace que las importaciones aumenten
en un 0,60%.
Palabras clave: efectos, exportación. importación,
ingreso nacional, Kazajstán
1. Introduction
The relationship between exports, imports and economic growth is one of the issues
discussed in the economic literature. The most common evidence among economists is
that exports have a positive impact on economic growth. In the last 40 years, many
developing countries have abandoned their growth policies based on their import
substitution, and have shifted to export-oriented growth policy (Zang and Baimbridge,
2012).
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, a new restructuring process started in
Kazakhstan. In the beginning of the 1990s, the transition from the central planned and
outward-facing model to an open model dominated by the market mechanism began.
Kazakhstan has undergone various reforms in foreign trade within the framework of
reforms aimed at establishing a multifaceted economy and moving to a free market.
These, liberalization of foreign trade prices, restructuring of the foreign trade system,
diversification of the market and changing the exchange system (Larsson, 2010).
The foreign trade reforms implemented by Kazakhstan started in terms of liberalization
in foreign trade. In the liberalization of foreign trade, all import quotas were terminated,
tariffs were reduced, all quotas and licenses applied, central export structure of strategic
goods were canceled and barter trade was prohibited. With these measures, Kazakhstan
has largely liberalized its foreign trade system, which has positively affected the
country’s foreign trade.
Today, the foreign trade reform in Kazakhstan is largely completed. In this process, the
structure of foreign trade has been largely liberalized by being not centralized, and
foreign trade has turned to countries outside the former Soviet countries.
Kazakhstan has made an effort to enter the World Trade Organization (WTO) in order to
ensure continuity in trade relations and to carry out its trade with developed countries,
which are important in terms of foreign trade, on a more solid basis and on the 30th of
November 2015 it became the 162th member of WTO.
In this study, the relationship between export, import and economic growth in
Kazakhstan was investigated with ARDL cointegration test approach. Following this
introductory chapter, the economy of Kazakhstan was evaluated in general. In the
second part, the foreign trade structure of Kazakhstan was evaluated. In the third
chapter, theoretical and empirical literature related to the subject are given. In the fourth
chapter, data set, model and econometric method are explained. In the last section, the
results of the application were evaluated and the study with the result section was
completed.
1.1. Overview of the Economy of Kazakhstan
The Republic of Kazakhstan was governed by the central planning economy of the USSR
for approximately 70 years. After independence, it has been trying to develop its
economy in a way that it can stand on its own feet in a new economic system - free
market economy for 28 years (Syzdykova, 2018). This process, with the efforts to
strengthen the economy; a troubled period that was not easy at all Özdil T., Turdaliyeva
A., (2015). Two years after the independence, the hyperinflation period in Kazakhstan
(1660%) has begun, but since 1996, it has achieved a steady growth trend, albeit at a
low level (Figure 1).
Figure 1
GDP growth rate in Kazakhstan (1991-2017)Source: World Bank data
As can be seen from Figure 1, Kazakhstan’s economy grew by 6.5% on average in the
years 1999-2017. If we do not count the decrease due to the global crisis in 2009, gross
domestic product increased from approximately USD 18 billion to USD 159 billion during
the period. On the other hand, gross domestic product, which was 184.3 billion dollars in
2015, decreased significantly in 2016 and was 137 billion dollars. This is due to the
decline in world oil prices (Table 1).
Table 1
Basic Macroeconomic Indicators
of Kazakhstan (1995-2017)
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2016 2017
Population, total (million people) 15,8 14,8 15,1 16,3 17,5 17,7 18,1
GDP (bln dollars) 20,3 18,2 57,1 148 184,3 137,2 159,4
GDP per capita (dollar) 1288 1229 3771 9070 10510 7714 8837
GDP growth (annual%) -8,2 9,8 9,7 7,3 1,2 1,1 4
Inflation, consumer prices (annual%) 176,1 13,1 7,5 7,4 6,6 14,3 7,4
Exports (bln dollars) 5,9 10,2 30,4 65,5 52,9 43,6 55,7
Imports (bln dollars) 8,9 8,9 25,4 44,2 45,2 39,1 40,3
Current account balance (% of GDP) -1,0 2,0 -1,8 0,9 -2,8 -6,5 -3,4
Total reserves (bln dollars) 1,6 2,09 7,06 28,2 27,8 29,6 30,8
Foreign direct investment (bln dollars) 0.964 13,7 25,4 7,4 6,3 16,7 4,5
Portfolio investments (million dollars) ... 19,3 149,7 133,9 5,7 -24,9 21,9External debt stock, total (bln dollars) 3,7 12,8 43,8 119,2 153,4 164,1 167,6
External debt stocks (% of GDP) 18,5 75,7 84,7 92,6 88,5 131,7 118,4
Industry (% of GDP) 29,9 37,7 37,6 40,6 30,9 32,0 32,0
Service (% of GDP) 54,0 48,4 52,0 51,7 59,3 57,9 57,4
Manufacturing (% of GDP) 14,6 16,5 12,0 11,3 10,3 11,3 11,2
Agriculture (% of GDP) 12,3 8,1 6,4 4,5 4,7 4,6 4,4
Source: Created from World Bank data
As seen from the Table 1, the rate of inflation in Kazakhstan was 13.1% in 2000 and it
has been able to reduce it to a single digit number since 2005. The country’s total
exports are well above the import figures, and the country continues to provide foreign
trade surplus. In 2017, Kazakhstan realized approximately 56 billion dollars of exports
and 40 billion dollars of imports.
Looking at the sectoral distribution of gross domestic product, the service sector is the
sector with the highest share with 50% shares. Industrial sector is in second place. The
share of industry decreased from 40.6% in 2010 to 32% in 2017. The share of
manufacturing and agricultural sector in gross domestic product is 11.2% and 4.4%
respectively. The largest share in the industrial sector belongs to the mining and
quarrying sub-sector (National Bank of Kazakhstan, 2018).
Immediately after gaining its independence, Kazakhstan applied various incentives to
attract foreign investments in order to ensure its economic development. As a result, it
has become the country that attracts the most foreign direct investment among the
Central Asian countries. In 2017, Kazakhstan’s total foreign direct investment inflows
were 147 billion dollars. In Kazakhstan, foreign direct investments, which have reached
5-6% of gross domestic product, are mainly concentrated in the oil and natural gas
sector. 50-70% of the total foreign investments coming to Kazakhstan come to the
energy sector.
Kazakhstan’s external debt stock has increased year on year, with total external debt
stock amounting to 167.6 billion dollars in 2017. When the structure of external debt
stock is examined; the share of public sector within the external debt stock is 8.4% and
the share of the private sector is 91.6%. Moreover, 95.8% of Kazakhstan’s total external
debt is composed of long-term debt. The share of inter-company debts arising from
foreign direct investments made by foreign countries in long-term debts is very high. In
addition, Kazakhstan owes approximately 120 countries, while 85% of its external debts
belong to only 11 countries. These countries respectively; Netherlands, USA, France,
Japan, Bermuda Islands, England, Russia, Virgin Islands, South Korea, China, Hong Kong
and Switzerland (National Bank of Kazakhstan, 2018).
1.2. The Structure of Foreign Trade in Kazakhstan
After Kazakhstan gained its independence, the reforms it had made in foreign trade and
the foreign trade policy mentioned, on the other hand, Kazakhstan’s high import-export
potential, significant developments in the field of foreign trade of the national economy
emerged. According to Trade Map data, Kazakhstan is ranked 50th in the world in terms
of total exports and it is in the 62th place in terms of imports (Trade Map, 2019).
Kazakhstan’s foreign trade volume amounted to 98 billion 429 million dollars in 2017, of
which 55.7 billion dollars was for export and 42.6 billion dollars for import. Kazakhstan’s
foreign trade volume increased 15-fold compared to the first years of independence
(Figure 2).Until 1998, Kazakhstan gave significant deficits in foreign trade. In 1995, the country’s
foreign trade deficit was 126 million dollars, while in 1998 it was approximately $ 1
billion. However, after 2001, foreign trade started to give a surplus in oil prices which is
the most important export item in Kazakhstan. Due to the fact that oil and gas are the
main components of the country’s exports, the changes in the prices of these products in
the world markets cause the foreign trade balance of Kazakhstan to continuously
fluctuate. Since production in Kazakhstan is mostly concentrated in the oil and gas
sectors, the demand for capital and consumer goods in the country cannot be met. The
insufficiency of capital and consumer goods in Kazakhstan causes the country’s economy
to be an economy based on imports. For this reason, the country’s large and open
boundaries in the country, cheap, illegal and even in terms of quality is very high in the
inflow of goods (Yücememiş et al., 2017). The ratio of exports to imports in Kazakhstan
is around 130%.
Figure 2
Import and export of Kazakhstan
(million dollars)
Source: World Bank data
Crude oil accounts for 67.7% of Kazakhstan’s total exports in 2017. Natural gas, iron and
steel, copper and ore, slag (coal crumbs) and ash follow respectively. This shows that the
energy and iron and steel industry is dominant in production in Kazakhstan (Table 2).
Table 2
Major Export Products of Kazakhstan (Million Dollars)
Product Label 2001 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 %
Mineral fuels, mineral 4757 19525 41032 63456 64485 64621 60700 31119 22334 30679 63.5
oils
Iron and steel 1008 2244 3683 6122 5890 3252 3383 2500 2750 4186 8.7
Copper and articles 704 1507 2153 3294 3770 2921 1830 2008 1918 2526 5.2
thereof
Inorganic chemicals 271 846 2609 3011 3533 3129 2839 3105 2413 2168 4.5Ores, slag and ash 221 925 2185 4428 3994 2729 2603 1084 1193 2102 4.3
Zinc and articles 157 312 555 768 1031 487 588 577 553 837 1.7
thereof
Cereals 343 240 988 759 1694 1338 1135 832 816 829 1.7
Precious stones, 236 399 1213 1649 1893 1119 754 747 649 594 1.2
precious metals
Aluminium and 48 25 372 557 492 489 380 419 382 533 1.1
articles thereof
Products of the 28 147 556 565 619 587 574 499 518 487 1.0
milling industry
Salt; sulphur; earths 49 102 298 711 742 521 586 549 359 363 0.8
and stone
Various grains, seeds 2 5 31 91 253 187 273 230 203 279 0.6
and fruits
Lead and articles 56 89 179 359 324 159 209 190 222 256 0.5
thereof
Other 605 1480 1390 2337 3561 3159 3604 2095 2465 2503 5.2
All products 8485 27846 57244 88107 92281 84698 79458 45954 36775 48342 100
Source: Trade Map, 2019
In the importation of Kazakhstan; in 2017, the most important import items were
electrical machines with a share of 18.3% and 10% with machinery-mechanical devices
(Table 3). However, the high volume of unregistered trade in the country makes the
attempts to follow the course of imports difficult. Kazakhstan’s large, easy-to-pass
borders with Russia, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan allow for small-scale border trade, but
the volume of border trade cannot be reflected in foreign trade date (Anessov, 2015:
29).
Table 3
Main Imported Products of Kazakhstan
(Million Dollars)
Product Label 2001 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 %
Machinery, 1322 3381 4326 5561 6806 7497 6852 5600 4397 4719 16.1
mechanical
appliances
Electrical machinery 529 1521 2527 3815 3940 3997 3976 3068 2428 3017 10.3
and equipment
Mineral fuels, mineral 793 2062 2379 4878 4814 5472 2319 1681 1516 1768 6.0
oils and products of
their distillationVehicles and parts 519 1697 1038 1871 3309 4511 4401 2021 1108 1750 6.0
Articles of iron or 588 1565 1770 2005 3514 4416 2524 2584 1958 1706 5.8
steel
Plastics and articles 125 431 783 1245 1397 1594 1485 1093 980 1121 3.8
thereof
Pharmaceutical 120 415 924 985 1298 1614 1420 1222 961 1093 3.7
products
Iron and steel 142 658 498 1082 1204 1148 1049 875 656 1033 3.5
Medical or 156 343 757 1972 1066 1231 1120 794 748 904 3.1
pharmaceutical
products
Ores, slag and ash 60 124 111 195 634 373 532 525 694 857 2.9
Miscellaneous 106 230 360 449 524 591 566 455 434 642 2.2
chemical products
Furniture 102 275 650 792 725 786 789 594 440 571 1.9
Other 1718 4631 7900 13160 15307 15574 14262 10055 8854 10164 34.6
All products 6280 17333 24023 38010 44538 48804 41295 30567 25174 29345 100
Source: Trade Map, 2019
In 2017, the first three places in Kazakhstan’s exports were Italy (17.93%), China
(11.95%) and the Netherlands (9.82%). Kazakhstan’s total imports in 2017 decreased
by 10.7 billion dollars to 30 billion dollars. According to 2017 date, Kazakhstan’s imports
were mostly from Russia with a share of 39.10%. Russia was followed by China
(15,99%) and Germany (5,06%) (Table 4).
Table 4
Foreign Trade of Kazakhstan by Major Countries
(million dollars)
EXPORT
Importers 2001 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 %
Italy 956 4190 9576 15045 15465 16480 16051 8136 7474 8669 17.93
China 646 2422 10122 16291 16484 14373 9799 5480 4214 5777 11.95
Netherlands 141 877 4160 6637 7479 9888 8724 4980 3255 4748 9.82
Russia 1733 2926 3006 7514 6747 5875 6388 4547 3509 4515 9.34
Switzerland 378 5509 1234 4952 4965 4313 4539 2659 2687 3100 6.41
France 7 2665 4433 5414 5632 5460 4690 2681 1798 2861 5.92Spain 6 464 921 1135 768 1846 2363 1219 992 1444 2.99
Uzbekistan 150 242 1101 1179 1343 1145 1083 942 922 1250 2.59
Turkey 74 156 1234 2574 3229 2603 2272 1275 851 1145 2.37
Ukraine 490 200 665 2670 2549 2041 1672 1173 911 1138 2.35
Other 3904 8195 20792 24696 27620 20674 21877 12862 10162 13695 28.33
Total 8485 27846 57244 88107 92281 84698 79458 45954 36775 48342 100
IMPORT
Exporters 2001 2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 %
Russia 2751 6581 5475 16269 17110 17971 13807 10529 9129 11472 39.10
China 171 1251 3964 5021 7497 8364 7357 5087 3665 4692 15.99
Germany 485 1298 1828 2082 2270 2455 2314 1985 1443 1484 5.06
USA 347 1204 1315 1716 2119 2155 1993 1484 1276 1253 4.27
Italy 268 679 1581 1145 960 1036 1039 1176 835 946 3.22
Uzbekistan 81 254 473 770 817 970 1017 725 587 735 2.51
Turkey 136 399 616 729 786 926 1019 741 618 730 2.49
South Korea 110 256 527 622 956 1265 1066 607 453 567 1.93
France 141 291 501 687 584 1032 1085 670 660 535 1.82
Belarus 46 207 251 623 675 698 773 488 332 508 1.73
Other 1744 4913 7492 8346 10764 11932 9825 7075 6176 6423 21.88
Total 6280 17333 24023 38010 44538 48804 41295 30567 25174 29345 100
Source: Trade Map, 2019
2. Literature Review
The relationships between export, import and economic growth have been a subject of
much interest in the development and growth literature. The neoclassical view argues
that there is a strong relationship between export expansion and economic growth, and
that export expansion is one of the main determinants of growth. This causality from
export to economic growth has been labeled in the literature as the export-led growth
hypothesis (Çetintaş and Barişik, 2009). The number of studies on the economy of
Kazakhstan is quite low. This is a situation that will increase the importance of this study.
Çetintaş and Barişik (2009) examined the relationship between export, import and
economic growth for the 13 transition economies, including Kazakhstan. The result of thestudy shows that there is a one-way causality from economic growth to exports in these countries. It has been determined that the export hypothesis based on growth in transition economies is valid and that growth is more shaped by the increase in import demand. In the study Sarı et al. (2010), investigated the relationship between economic growth and export in 5 Turkish Republics with data 1990-2008. In the short term, the authors stated that there is a one-way causality relationship from economic growth to exports and found that there is a bidirectional causality relationship between economic growth and exports in the long term. Safdari et al. (2011) studied the relationship between export and economic growth in their work on 13 Asian countries and found a one-way causality relationship from exports to economic growth. In his study Ağayev (2011), the panel of former Soviet Union (in 12 transition economies) conducted panel cointegration and panel causality analysis to show the relationship between export and economic growth in the country. The results of the research show that the increase in exports does not cause economic growth, in other words, the export-based growth hypothesis is not valid for these countries. The findings show the existence of a one-way relationship between growth and exports in both short and long term. In their study Gül et al. (2013), gained independence with the collapse of the Eastern Bloc 6 investigated the growth of Turkey’s foreign trade and relations with the Turkish Republic. As a result of the analyzes, while there is a bilateral causality between export and growth in the long run, a unilateral causality relation from import to growth has been determined. However, this result was not reached in the short term. As a result of the study, the authors emphasize that Turkish Republics cannot achieve growth without reaching a certain level of industrialization and without macroeconomic transformations. In the study Yardimcioglu and Gulmez (2013), the relationship between export and economic growth in the six Turkish Republics for the period 1995-2011 is to investigate. Panel cointegration tests, Pedroni FMOLS, Panel VECM and Pedroni Panel Causality methods were used in this study. As a result it was observed that the export and economic growth variables in the said countries had a cointegration relationship in the long term and the long term coefficient was 0.40. This means that an increase of 100 dollars in exports across the 6 Turkish Republics results in an increase of approximately 40 dollars in the long run over economic growth. However, according to the results of short-term causality analysis using Vector error correction model, bilateral and causality between export and economic growth have been determined both in the short term and in the long term. In the study Ganiyev (2016) comparatively analyze the relationships between exchange rate, import, export and GDP in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, with ARDL cointegration approach. The results showed that foreign trade has positive impact on economic growth in Kyrgyzstan, both in the short and in the long term, whereas Kazakhstan imports play a greater role in economic growth. On the other hand, it revealed that export in Kyrgyzstan in the short term depends on the GDP and imports; in the long term re- export is coming to the fore. Also, it turned out that volatility of exchange rates in Kyrgyzstan, increasing uncertainties and risks, have a negative impact on economic growth, while devaluation in Kazakhstan reduce imports in the short and long run. 3. Methodology In this study, the gross domestic product (GDP), export (X) and import (M) data of 2000Q1-2017Q4 period were used. All data were seasonally adjusted and the logarithm was taken with Tramo Seats method. All data were obtained from Central Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The general course of the variables used in graphical analysis is presented. According to this, the gross domestic product in Kazakhstan, exports and imports are constantly growing.
Figure 3
Graphic representation of the variables
The coefficient of the error correction term (ρ) in the short term equation shows the
rotation speed of the series to equilibrium. In the same way, the individual models are
estimated for cases where the export (lnX) and import (lnM) data are dependent
variables.4. Results and discussion
In order to test whether the series has a unit root, augmented Dickey–Fuller (ADF,
Dickey and Fuller, 1981) a unit root test is used. The results for the ADF unit root test
are reported in Table 5.
Table 5
ADF unit root test results
The results show in Table 5 that all variables (lnGDP, lnX and lnM) are not stationary at
levels but stationary after first differences. A mix order of integration can be claimed
after the unit root analyses. But, it is sufficient for the further cointegration analyses as
ARDL is valid technique in this case.
According to the ARDL cointegration test method, if the found F-statistic is higher than
the upper limit I (1) created by Pesaran et al., (2001), it is concluded that these series
are cointegrated.
Table 6 displays the cointegration results of our models. According to the critical values
of Pesaran et al., (2001), it can be rejected the hypothesis which states that there is no
cointegration in the models where the GDP is the dependent variable of imports in
Kazakhstan; in cases where exports are dependent variables, it cannot be rejected.
Table 6
F-statistic of cointegration relationship
Dependent variable Explanatory variables F-statistic Lower, I (0) Upper, I (1)
lnGDP lnX, lnM 10.609* 3.79 4.85
lnX lnGDP, lnM 3.976 3.79 4.85
lnM lnGDP, lnX 5.320* 3.79 4.85
Note: The critical values presented in the table were
obtained from Case III, Peseran et al. (2001: 300).
* indicates 1% significance level
According to the long-term coefficients (Table 7), the increase in both exports and
imports increases the country's GDP, ie. foreign trade contributes significantly to the
growth of the country's economy. 1% increase in exports in the long term leads to an
increase of 0.38% in GDP, while the increase in imports by 1% leads to an increase of
0.42% in GDP. The long-term effect of exports is stronger than the short-term effect.
Imports have a negative impact on economic growth in the short term and have a
positive effect on the long term. Likewise, income elasticity of imports was statistically
significant and positive. An increase of 1% in economic growth causes imports to
increase by 0.60%.
Table 7
Long-Term Coefficients* and ** show 1% and 5% significance levels
Error citation models were estimated after cointegration relationships (Table 8).
Table 8
Error Correction Models
* and ** show 1% and 5% significance levels
It is seen that there is a significant effect of both exports and imports with their own
delays to the GDP of Kazakhstan. The effect of only 2nd delay on imports was
statistically significant at 5% significance level and its coefficient was negative. In other
words, the effect of imports on growth in the short term is more negative. On the other
hand, both GDP and export variables affect imports in the short term. However, the fact
that both the GDP and the error correction terms of imports are high (-0.41 and -0.36
respectively) indicate that their speed to return to equilibrium is high.
5. Conclusions
Studies in the literature have shown that exports have positive direct and indirect effects
on the economy in general. It is observed that imports have a negative direct impact on
national income. On the other hand, it is suggested that imports of raw materials,
intermediate and capital goods provide domestic production increase, and productivity
increases in production through technology imports and that imports may have positive
indirect effects on economic growth. The existence and effectiveness of these impacts
are generally attributed to the share of foreign trade in the national economy and the
structure of foreign trade.
Developing countries generally adopt the import substitution policy of import goods with
domestic goods, or export-oriented industrialization strategy integrated with the
international economy. As in all transition economies, the economy of Kazakhstan is
experiencing the troubles of the transition to free market economy, generally based on
the export of low value-added raw materials foreign trade structure, consumption and
the presence of economic structure based on imports of intermediate goods, high value-
added products cannot be produced, technological developments sufficiently to follow,
such as foreign dependency bears the basic problems.In the application part of the study, ARDL test was used in Kazakhstan to examine the relationship between economic growth, export and import. In this context, long and short term relationships between variables were estimated. According to the results, imports are an important source of growth due to external dependency in technology and investment goods (machinery and equipment share in total imports exceed 30%). At the same time, this may explain the increase in growth triggering imports. Since exports consist of approximately minerals, exports are mostly affected by external demand and the situation of world mineral markets and GDP is not affected by import variables. In this respect, macroeconomic policies should be implemented quickly in accordance with the 2050 strategy plan. In this context; It is necessary to establish an economic system in which high value added products are produced by using advanced technologies based on free market economy financed by foreign capital and more domestic savings. Bibliographic references Ağayev, S. (2011). İhracat ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: 12 geçiş ekonomisi örneğinde panel eştümleşme ve panel nedensellik analizleri. Ege Akademik Bakış, 11(2), 241-254. Anessov, O. (2015). “Kazakistan ve Türkiye Ticari ve Ekonomik İlişkilerinin Büyümeye Katkıları”. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. İktisat Anabilim Dalı. Uluslararası İktisat Bilim Dalı. İstanbul. Çetintaş, H., & Barişik, S. (2009). Export, import and economic growth: The case of transition economies. Transition Studies Review, 15(4), 636-649. Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1057-1072. Fosu, A. K. (1990). Exports and economic growth: the African case. World Development, 18(6), 831-835. Ganiyev, J.(2016). Kırgızistan ve Kazakistan’da Dış Ticaret, Döviz Kuru ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(3), 89-101. Gül, E., Kamacı, A., & Konya, S. (2013). Dış ticaretin büyüme üzerine etkileri: Türk Cumhuriyetleri ve Türkiye örneği. Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 35, 1-12. Larsson, J. (2010). The Transition in Kazakhstan: from command to market economy. Department of Economics at the University of Lund, Minor Field Study Series, (199). National Bank of Kazakhstan, (2018). https://nationalbank.kz/? docid=146&switch=kazakh (Date of access: 09.03.2019). Özdil T., Turdaliyeva A., (2015). Çıktı Sources of Economic Growth in the Kazakhstan Economy: An Analysis with an Input-Output Analysis Approach ‘. International Eurasian Economies Conference 2015 Proceedings. pp. 841-845. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of applied econometrics, 16(3), 289-326. Safdari, M., Mahmoodi, M., & Mahmoodi, E. (2011). The causality relationship between export and economic growth in Asian developing countries. American Journal of Scientific Research, 25, 40-45. Sarı, S., Gerni, C., Değer, K., & Emsen, Ö. S. (2010, November). Geçiş Sürecindeki Türk Cumhuriyetlerinde Ekonomik Büyüme ve İhracat İlişkileri. In International Conference on Eurasian Economies (Vol. 2010, pp. 392-397). Syzdykova, A. (2018). Orta Asya Ülkelerinde Enerji Tüketimi Ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Panel Veri Analizi. Journal of Economics & Administrative Sciences/Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(1). Trade Map, (2019). https://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx, (Date of access: 09.03.2019). Yardımcıoğlu, F., & Gülmez, A. (2013). Türk cumhuriyetlerinde ihracat ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Panel eşbütünleşme ve panel nedensellik analizi. Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 8(1), 145-161.
Yücememiş, B. T., Arıcan, E., & Alkan, U. Türkiye–Özbekistan–Kazakistan Ekonomik
İlişkileri Ve Bankacılık Sistemi. Finansal Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi, 9(17), 161-
203.
Zang, W., & Baimbridge, M. (2012). Exports, imports and economic growth in South
Korea and Japan: a tale of two economies. Applied Economics, 44(3), 361-372.
1. Akhmet Yassawi University, Turkestan, Kazakhstan
2. Akhmet Yassawi University, Turkestan, Kazakhstan
3. Akhmet Yassawi University, Turkestan, Kazakhstan. Email: dinmukhamed.kelesbayev@ayu.edu.kz
4. Yessenov University, Aktau, Kazakhstan
5. Yessenov University, Aktau, Kazakhstan
6. Yessenov University, Aktau, Kazakhstan
7. Yessenov University, Aktau, Kazakhstan
Revista ESPACIOS. ISSN 0798 1015
Vol. 40 (Nº 35) Year 2019
[Index]
[In case you find any errors on this site, please send e-mail to webmaster]
©2019. revistaESPACIOS.com • ®Rights ReservedYou can also read
